- Pakistani govt tells Swiss court not to hand late Benazir’s jewellery to her husband because they had not mentioned these articles or the assets listed with their company Bomer Finance in their assets details submitted with the Election Commission of Pakistan
Though Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) Co-chairman Asif Ali Zardari (AAZ) pledged his support for the Nawaz government by coming all the way from Karachi to “save it from undemocratic forces”, the Pakistan Muslim League – Nawaz (PML-N) regime has “denied returning the favour” by asking a Swiss court not to hand him a necklace bought by former PPP chairperson Benazir Bhutto with a Law Ministry lawyer alleging that the jewellery was bought by “ill-gotten money”.
The government has made this request with a Swiss court to challenge the appeal of Zardari’s law firm filed on March 3, 2014. In the petition, Bomer Finance Inc., the company representing Zardari, had sought the release of the necklace set purchased by BB.
However, Python & Peter, the company representing the PML-N government, has asked the court not to release the costly necklace which had been seized on orders of the court as the assets used to purchase the jewellery set for BB was of “illicit origin”, and subject to seizure and confiscation as per a legislation enacted in 2011 (LRAI).
The government’s request, a copy of which is available with Pakistan Today, has been submitted by the same Swiss law firm, which was hired by Saifur Rehman of Ehtasab Bureau fame back in 1998, against BB and Zardari for alleged corruption and kickbacks received.
The request available with Pakistan Today has been written in French but its translation is also available with this scribe.
The government has argued that Zardari and BB had not mentioned this jewellery or the assets listed with their company Bomer Finance in their assets details submitted with the Election Commission of Pakistan and hence, both could be disqualified for life if they wanted to get this jewellery.
Bomer Finance Inc., a BVI company, allegedly was involved in collecting and transferring part of the kickbacks to the couple.
A month later, on April 4 this year, the government’s lawyer’s firm Python & Peter, submitted a rejoinder in the court, challenging the appeal made by Bomer Finance and requested the court not to return the necklace.
François Roger Micheli, the lawyer representing Pakistan government, also has contacted the prosecutor In-charge of the case, Yves Bertossa, the son of former prosecutor general Bernard Bertossa, who had actually initiated the penal investigation against BB, Zardari and others in 1997.
In its observations, Pakistan government’s lawyer Micheli had termed that Bomer Finance Inc. was a company without economic substance and was responsible for the sole activity of which consisted in collecting and transferring part of the kickbacks to BB and Zardari.
“Assets totalling USD 59’457’040 have been identified in Switzerland and seized as belonging to BB, Zardari, Jens Schlegelmilch, the brother-in-law of Jens Schlegelmilch Jahangir Ebadi, and the mother of BB, Nusrat Bhutto. No part of these important assets is listed in the returns filed by BB and Zardari with the Election Commission,” a rejoinder filed by the government in Swiss court stated.
“In its recourse, Bomer Finance Inc. pretends that Zardari is its beneficial owner. As per press statement made by his spokesman on 01.04.2014, Zardari however denies having asked for the release of the jewellery set, denies that the jewellery set belongs to him, and denies that the jewellery set belonged to BB. The court of appeal is requested to clarify this contradiction,” said the government’s lawyer.
He contended to the court that the jewellery set was seized in the premises of the jewellery shop Chatila SA in Geneva. “If it was to be ‘released’ to anyone, it could only be to Chatila SA, and not to Bomer Finance Inc. As they stand, the prayers for relief of Bomer Finance Inc. can only be rejected,” the prayer maintained.
“The Republic of Pakistan is not aware of any decision by the prosecutor general which (as Bomer Finance Inc. puts forward in its recourse) lifts the freezing. Factual allegations made in the recourse are inaccurate,” the lawyer stated.
“It is BB and not Zardari, who chose and purchased the jewellery set at a London shop of Chatila SA, contrary to what Bomer Finance Inc. puts forward. The appraisals of (i) the Geneva Examining Magistrate who issued the indictments, of (ii) the Misdemeanors Court of Geneva which held that the offence called for a sentence exceeding what it was competent to inflict, and of (iii) the Prosecutor General of Geneva, who demanded that the Examining Magistrate issues additional indictments for aggravated money laundering, all confirm the seriousness of the money laundering charges,” the government’s response asserted.
“The assets used to purchase the jewellery set are thus deemed to be of illicit origin, and subject to seizure and confiscation as per a legislation enacted in 2011 (LRAI). The shelving order rendered by the Geneva Prosecutor General on 25 August 2008 is not compatible with the findings of the various aforementioned authorities, and is based on the NRO. It is on record in the Geneva penal proceeding that the NRO has been annulled by the Supreme Court of Pakistan, which has ordered also that all measures taken on the basis of the NRO are void and of nil effect.”
The government’s statement added that the Court of Appeal has already judged that the Geneva penal proceeding could nevertheless not be taken up again, the recourse of the Republic of Pakistan having been filed outside of time-limit due to a “dysfunction” within Pakistan authorities.
The statement added that several other institutional dysfunctions have been observed in the case pertaining to BB and Zardari.
“Farook H Naek, who appeared as personal attorney for BB in the Geneva criminal proceeding, was appointed in Ministry of Justice immediately after the political party of Zardari won the general elections of 2008; Pakistan has obtained mutual legal assistance not only from Switzerland, but also from France, UK, Poland and Spain. Nevertheless, it did not succeed in condemning definitively the concerned offenders for their acts.”
Regarding in particular the proceeding concerning Bomer Finance Inc., Zardari and BB, the Supreme Court quashed the Lahore High Court Condemnation of 1999 for formal reasons.
Pakistan has not succeeded in bringing the matter for trial to court again, as the Geneva prosecutor general points out in his shelving order, the statement added.
These elements show that in the past, the judicial process could not perform properly. This is also relevant in view of the LRAI, the lawyer asserted.
“The returns filed by BB and AAZ in 1996 and 1997 with the Election Commission of Pakistan do not list the assets of Bomer Finance Inc., nor the disputed jewellery set. There appears to have been an extraordinary wealth increase of BB and AAZ during the tenures of BB. These elements are also relevant in view of the LRAI”.
The statement added that in the context of the Geneva penal proceeding, a financial analysis had been made on August 10, 2000.
“For years during which BB was prime minister of Pakistan, the country’s ranking according to the transparency International Corruption Perception index was the following : 1995: 39th rank on 41 States; 1996: 53rd rank on 54 states. This illustrates the perception of the level of corruption which existed during the government of BB, and is relevant in view of the LRAI. In view of the above, Pakistan observes that the recourse (by Zardari) can only be rejected, with costs,” the government’s lawyer concluded.